Forum menu
This all sounds great, when is this happening?
Oh, yes… it’s not.
Again, I'm sick of saying this, try looking beyond your own borders. It is up here. Not as much as it should be but it IS happening.
Yep, you cannot just give examples of people buying houses in very cheap parts of the country. A lot of people don't live in cheap parts of the country and we can't all move to them can we. Are half the country supposed to move to where property is cheaper to sort of this issue?
A new estate was built a few miles down the road from me a few years ago (and this was in a cheaper area) and on one end are the 6 very basic looking affordable terrace houses they had to build. £400K each and nothing else is being built that is any cheaper.
100% inheritance tax or near 100% would help resolve this. Randomly giving people huge sums of money on the basis of which vagina they happened to fall out of drives huge inequality.
So how does the 100% inheritance tax get distributed to those in need of support in a fair way?
So how does the 100% inheritance tax get distributed to those in need of support in a fair way?
I think you missed his point.
Clearly - I still don’t see it now.
You give it to the treasury so the tories can give it to their mates. Simple..
Reading this with increasing sympathy for all sides and can't see any obvious solutions, all I will say is that we are walking backwards into the future so what we see in the past has to be used to each of our own advantages and priorities going forward, it's a wise man who learns from the mistakes of others. Anecdotally I'd like to say that I was happy to be renting when my pal and his wife were paying an 18% mortgage in the eighties and working 24/6 , getting reported to social services for leaving their kids home alone 'cos they were working ALL the time to feed themselves and the bank, his wife only cooked for husband and kids , eating leftovers to save pennies.Now they are quids in but it's been a struggle for them. Another interesting case.....12 years ago a Bulgarian lad turned up at my workplace, straight off the bus penniless, we are 25 miles from Manchester city centre, he didn't know where he was but our boss set him on as a labourer on minimum wage, now he is still on minimum wage but is buying a nice semi near the park is married with two lovely daughters and drives a 3 year old Merc, he thinks England is great, don't know what this proves, just saying..........
No one inherits anything was his point.....
But that would require whole world revolution other wise those with money would offshore it.
The problem with any radical policies is there always another country willing to accept your money and undermine the original country
No one inherits anything was his point…..
Ahh I see. Of course that is an impossible solution as people would simply gift their property to whoever before they die.
100% inheritance tax would not work. Marin you have 3 weeks left to live. Oh bugger, turn all my savings into gold if I have any and give the godchildren a shoe box of gold to go sell off as and when. Illegal yes, impossible no.
Universal basic income solves all these issues, but people will somehow have to get over their lazy stereotypes to any sort of 'benefit' system.
A lot of people don’t live in cheap parts of the country and we can’t all move to them can we. Are half the country supposed to move to where property is cheaper to sort of this issue?
Well covid has taught the world that we don’t all need to go to offices to work - so therefore the clustering of people around our big cities and the consequential impact on house demand/prices is something which could change.
Oh bugger, turn all my savings into gold if I have any and give the godchildren a shoe box of gold
You wait....
Time passes....
Marin sits down and starts singing about gold...
100% (or something close to it) inheritance tax would be possible with the correct political will. Just apply the same deprevation of assets rules that apply to care homes or just say that any gifts within 15 years of death are subject to the tax.
The gold problem is also fairly easy to address. A box of gold only has a value to the holder if they can use it - if you gave your kids a box of gold what are they going to say when they come to use it for a house deposit and they're asked where it comes from?
Note I don't think it will happen, esp once Scotland leaves the union in the next few years. After that it'll be a Tory driven race to the bottom.
Universal basic income solves all these issues,
In what way does that mythical solution help..... Ubi will drive up the price of any in demand commodity by UBI value.... You'd just giving BTL owners more cash to throw at their port folio
You could happily subsidise your life with gold sold off or a box of money whilst saving legitimate funds. There is no one easy solution and 100% inheritance tax will just lead to even bigger tax fraud on a massive scale.
Wait, we're up to shoe boxes full of gold now?
Kids today...
Ubi will drive up the price of any in demand commodity by UBI value…. You’d just giving BTL owners more cash to throw at their port folio
You are talking about inflation which is always the first argument against UBI. Governments can control inflation very successfully e.g vast quantitative easing did not lead to inflation. UBI gives everyone liquidity regardless of where they come form. It's captalism just not from zero.
Also we have house prices inflation now, BTL is not built on cash it's access to credit
Honestly, perhaps this is the issue. For me Cougar, it’s your scenario (houses at £60k, people on minimum wage buying a new build) that don’t have any basis in my reality. Average house price where I live is about £300k.
Sure, and I appreciate that we're an outlier here in the opposite direction. I can only dream of being able to afford such a property, it's taken me to my late 40s to get to this point. I could no doubt have made better decisions along the way as regards where my money went, but here we are.
Yep, you cannot just give examples of people buying houses in very cheap parts of the country. A lot of people don’t live in cheap parts of the country and we can’t all move to them can we. Are half the country supposed to move to where property is cheaper to sort of this issue?
All? Of course not. But I'll wager there's a lot fewer who cannot move than you'd think. Most people won't want to move for any number of perfectly valid reasons: they like their job; they want to be close to ailing relatives; their mates are all down there; it's been their home all your life; and so forth.
But ultimately that's the choice you make. You can buy your quarter of a million pound house that's falling apart whilst arguing that you "can't" move elsewhere because you get free childcare from your parents; you could move 200 miles north, get a nicer property for half the price so you or your wife could stay at home looking after the kids, or put the sackload of cash you've just saved towards day care even; you could move your parents up with you.
Someone doesn't want to move, that's absolutely fine and totally understandable. If roles were reversed I'd be reticent to move also. This is the first time I've done it, I'm moving seven miles away and I'm frankly bloody terrified. But as someone said above and I've floated previously in other threads, the current situation is going to mean that a lot of people (and businesses) have suddenly realised that they don't need to spend two hours a day commuting. And if the primary reason for living where you live is a job in the city that you can now do working from home then, well... no-one's nailed your feet to the floor.
"What would it take for house prices to REALLY plummet?" How about a near-vertical drop in the demand for commuter belt housing?
I'm going to invest in shoeboxes.
You are talking about inflation
I think your over complicating things.
Give everyone a UBI it lifts their spending power by UBI +wage.
Resetting/readjusting zero will not help.
All? Of course not. But I’ll wager there’s a lot fewer who cannot move than you’d think
Okay, and what do yo think would happen if 50% of the people moved from expensive places to cheaper places. The cheaper places would get a lot more expensive because of a A)shortage of supply and b) because more people live there and other things would come with that like the work opportunities.
I think your over complicating things.
Give everyone a UBI it lifts their spending power by UBI +wage.
Resetting/readjusting zero will not help
Not in isolation, no, but with the right regulation it could.
Let's follow the logical conclusion of everyone who can't afford to live moving, how does this actually work the vast majority of jobs still require you to be present - who is going to deliver your parcels, serve your food, look after the elderly, fix your car etc.. I thought we learnt the importance of key workers..
Shouldn’t they have saved up some claps?
It **** hard to get a house
Yes, but it’s hard for everyone, even counting those with parental help and/or other good fortune.
Sorry that's just not the case. For those with well off generous parents it's patently obviously easier.
100% (or something close to it) inheritance tax would be possible with the correct political will. Just apply the same deprevation of assets rules that apply to care homes or just say that any gifts within 15 years of death are subject to the tax
But those rules don't work either, do they. All the informed, well off people nip off to Legal and General to get themselves a "life insurance investment policy" with their lids as trustees, job done
Or so I hear.
But those rules don’t work either, do they. All the informed, well off people nip off to Legal and General to get themselves a “life insurance investment policy” with their lids as trustees, job done
There doesn't have to be loop holes in tax law you know. They're only their due to lobbying from interest groups.
This is a weird thread. A few suggestions have been made as to how to achieve a fairer society - e.g. a well structured 100% inheritance tax perhaps combined with UBI. Sure it's unlikely, but that's because people such as those saying it's impossible on this thread or those who are suggesting that people who are struggling to buy a house just need to work harder won't vote for policies such as this. There are plenty of things in the past that sounded like they could never happen until they did - e.g. the welfare state, banning of hunting with dogs, the universal declaration of Human rights, gay marriage, etc etc. All things that we now look back on and think that the old status quo was insane.
As we live in a democracy everyone is entitled to their view and that's fine. Evidentally there are many people on the thread who are fine with the status quo - I just hope those people are objectively honest about why that is with themselves.
Okay, and what do yo think would happen if 50% of the people moved from expensive places to cheaper places.
I've no idea. I'm saying most people have options. I'm not speculating about whether it'd be good or bad if they took different ones, your guess is as good - probably better, I'm no economist - as mine.
A few suggestions have been made as to how to achieve a fairer society – e.g. a well structured 100% inheritance tax perhaps combined with UBI.
Which ended up with shoeboxes full of gold...
Evidentally there are many people on the thread who are fine with the status quo
I think you'll find that most people are not happy with it, but they recognise that as pretty much the entire UK economy is based on it, the best option for most people is to use the status quo as the framework to work within in order to live their lives.
I just hope those people are objectively honest about why that is with themselves.
If you're going to do this kind of passive-aggressive shite at least make it interesting.
House prices have gone up 1% since this thread started! 🙂
Let’s follow the logical conclusion of everyone who can’t afford to live moving, how does this actually work the vast majority of jobs still require you to be present – who is going to deliver your parcels, serve your food, look after the elderly, fix your car etc.. I thought we learnt the importance of key workers..
...and yet that London with the worst house price nonsense in the UK still works...parcels are delivered, food is served, the elderly are looked after, cars are fixed. It's a poor system but it works and in the absence of any other system and with its' economic implications, it's probably best to get on with it.
…and yet that London with the worst house price nonsense in the UK still works…parcels are delivered, food is served, the elderly are looked after, cars are fixed. It’s a poor system but it works
There's a shocking amount of poverty in London, which suggests that the system works for you if you're online shopping, eating out, getting your arse wiped or having your bimmer serviced. Less so if you're doing any of that work.
Evidentally there are many people on the thread who are fine with the status quo – I just hope those people are objectively honest about why that is with themselves.
I'm not "fine with it" but I'm pragmatic enough to recognise I'm powerless to change a financial system, that I've only got do many units of energy, and so I need to deploy them sensibly to get the most favourable outcome I can.
There’s a shocking amount of poverty in London, which suggests that the system works for you if you’re online shopping, eating out, getting your arse wiped or having your bimmer serviced. Less so if you’re doing any of that work.
yes....
yes.........
We know this and no one is celebrating it or cheering it or happy with it, but that's how it is, that's how it has been and that's how it will be for the foreseeable future.
In what way does that mythical solution help….. Ubi will drive up the price of any in demand commodity by UBI value…. You’d just giving BTL owners more cash to throw at their port folio
You are right, except portfolio is one word 😉 but whilst I am a strong believer in UBI it cannot be introduced on it's own. It needs at the very least rent controls as well, and possibly other measures to ensure it isn't just gobbled up by inflation.
Of course, if you're a Tory and want to see it fail, not doing these things is a great way to torpedo it for generations.
Lifetime housing. The house is re-sold when you die. No exceptions. If your children want it, they get an automatic 20% off the price, houses can't be passed on within the purchaser lifetime, Money goes to a local quango that builds social hosing.
i reckon house prices would plummet.
Lifetime housing. The house is re-sold when you die. No exceptions
You mean rental?
Lifetime housing. The house is re-sold when you die. No exceptions. If your children want it, they get an automatic 20% off the price, houses can’t be passed on within the purchaser lifetime, Money goes to a local quango that builds social hosing.
i reckon house prices would plummet.
It's the best idea I've seen in this thread.
Beats UBI and shoeboxes of gold for me.
What if you want to move?
Or emigrate?
Or go into a home?
If I've paid for the house, it's mine, and i can sell it whenever I want to, to whoever I want to, for however much I want.
Still a bit shoeboxy for me.
We know this and no one is celebrating it or cheering it or happy with it, but that’s how it is, that’s how it has been and that’s how it will be for the foreseeable future.
Actually, lots of people (including myself, until I actually thought it through) have been happy with it, through support of most recent interventions in the housing market such as the £15k stamp duty bung or help to buy. I don't think getting on with it and being mindful of the impact of high house prices are necessarily mutually exclusive.
What if you want to move?
You sell it, and buy another just like you do now, but this way 100% of the housing stock eventually goes back onto the market.
Or emigrate?
Out of scope of OP question, I think it's called "mission creep" Here we're discussing how you force a housing crash, not how to afford emigrating.
Or go into a home?
The quango that build social hosing could also build and maintain social housing for the elderly if you want. But again, it's mission creep.
...and my shoebox factory?
Your investment is worthless now crikey.
🙂
or just say that any gifts within 15 years of death are subject to the tax.
So we’d all have to declare our Christmas and birthday presents from our parents just in case they might die within 15 years?
Depends. Are you talking about avoiding or evading a hypothetical tax?
Lifetime housing. The house is re-sold when you die. No exceptions. If your children want it, they get an automatic 20% off the price, houses can’t be passed on within the purchaser lifetime, Money goes to a local quango that builds social hosing.
Maybe adjust the concept to affordable rent controlled housing, rented from a local authority, once capital costs of construction are covered by rent, income can go into a pot for upkeep of properties and/or to cover costs for further housing construction? Upon a tenants death or vacating of the property it is available for a new tenant with a need for housing to live in. Not a million miles from, oh what's it called... A council house?
The shortfall is social housing still, in so many areas the gap is filled by private landlords with varying ethical standards.
BTL has been so enticing for people with the spare capital over the last 30 years precisely because there are lots of desperate people just wanting a place to live who will cover your mortgage while you accrue equity, which is fine.
But social housing should be the first choice and we've tied local authorities hands, first by flogging most of the stock off, then by letting developers wriggle out of any social housing commitments tied to planning and most recently by not allowing authorities the right to remortgage against their remaining properties in order to fund new construction.
Because, shock horror, our national government don't want to fund social housing construction. They want as near as possible an entirely private housing sector, where those with capital have control over those without in order to generate yet more personal wealth...
There’s a shocking amount of poverty in London,
As I said I'm no economist, but if I were homeless in London the first thing I'd do is start walking out of the place.
Lifetime housing. The house is re-sold when you die. No exceptions.
What about everything else you own? Your car, your furniture, your bike(s), your stereo system?
What happens to your partner who survives you? Or to their children? Are you evicting them, no exceptions, even though your partner owns half of the equity?
What happens to your partner's children if your partner checks out before you do? What if you hold 100% / 50% / 0% stake in the house?
No exceptions.
Complicated situations don't lend themselves well to simple solutions, much as we might like them to. That's how religions get started.
I suppose that in the past social housing was there for the less fortunate but now we have huge swathes of under 40’s (and older) in good jobs who cannot get on the housing market. Especially on their own.
Add in the increase in divorces and you have a much, much larger group of people who are trying to buy a 2 bed terraced house or similar. Guess what type of housing is rarely built? It's all large blocks of flats aimed at the BTL investors or family homes with 3+ tiny rooms, a tiny garden and a useless garage for £200k+. The single person (for whatever reason) earning around £25-30k has no real chance to get 'on the ladder' when everything is geared towards families with 2 incomes totalling 2-3x their own.
Complicated situations don’t lend themselves well to simple solutions
Sure, this is a back of a fag packet idea, not a white paper. The point is this. As we all know house value isn't tied to the actual value of the bricks and mortar, its value is that it's a large investment that you can pass on. (and location obviously) If you want house prices to come down, then remove the incentive for them to be valuable as anything other than somewhere to live, one way to do this would be to allow people only to own a home for their own lifetimes. You could easily overcome most of the difficulties you pointed out.
What happens to your partner who survives you? Or to their children?
If they have an interest in the house, the same thing that happens now. again, if they're orphaned as children they go into care, if not, they get everything...Just not the house. This has the added advantage of folk actually making some provision for their kids, which they will be able to afford, as house prices (if you want to buy) will probably fall, so you won;t need to "invest" all your money in a house.
What about everything else you own?
Same thing that happens now, you make a will. You still get to bequeath your cymbals to little Eliza who loved them so much (much to the annoyance of her parents)
The only change I'm making is that you can't pass on your house to the next generation. Once the purchaser dies, it gets sold. The point being, in order to make house prices plummet; you need to create a situation where a house has no intrinsic value, other than for somewhere to live in...Every 30-50 years or so, 100% of the housing stock gets sold through market. I read somewhere that 50% of the housing stock is mortgage free and never comes for sale. Imagine the collapse in house prices if twice as many house are available...
As I said I’m no economist, but if I were homeless in London the first thing I’d do is start walking out of the place.
Not really talking about homeless people, massive majority of those people are in homes, most of them are in work, they're in poverty because a huge % of their income is spent on housing.....
As we all know house value isn’t tied to the actual value of the bricks and mortar,
Maybe that is the answer. All land prices are equal and house prices solely depend on the actual value of materials/rebuild. Prices would increase in line with building cost.
Some more pie in the sky suggestions:
If a house is empty for a certain period of time (year?) Then it gets taken to be used as social housing. The owner still owns it, but the council are responsible for upkeep.
The owner can sell as a "tennanted" property, but cannot force an eviction. If the tennants leave voluntarily, the owner then has the chance to sell or rent it privately.
Result - reduction in unoccupied houses; landlords reducing the rent offered to entice people in; social housing at low cost to council. Slight fall in house prices due to increased supply. Foreign investors buying up developments in London, Manc. Etc are motivated to rent them out rather than leave them empty.
Maybe that is the answer. All land prices are equal and house prices solely depend on the actual value of materials/rebuild. Prices would increase in line with building cost.
I'm currently sat in a poorly built, 2 bed mid terrace (that I don't own). Its value is pushing £300k. Yes thats obscene, but the reason it costs that and a similar quality thing on a shit estate in a dying industrial town is 20% of the price is that I am surrounded by good transport links and a plethora of well paying jobs.
If every house cost its rebuild value, thousands of people would be lining up to buy it. And trying to out bid the other buyers. Straight away we are back where we started.
Gold and guns I tell ye!
I don't know about anyone else, but where I am (Surrey/Hants Borders), rents are actually cheaper than mortgages..
Example:
https://www.zoopla.co.uk/to-rent/details/49332789
3-bed detached with garage, £1425pcm
https://www.zoopla.co.uk/for-sale/details/55962446
3-bed detached with garage, £400k. 85%LTV mortgage at 3% over 25 years, £1612 a month.
Same street, virtually next to each other.
rents are actually cheaper than mortgages..
But you can't say that - the financial model of each is so completely different. For example, make that 35 years rather than 25. Or 20% deposit rather than 15%. Or 2% interest rather than 3%.
And a very quick Google shows deals costing around £910 a month with a 1.84% rate for a 25 yr term anyway(HSBC). Of course that is only a 2yr deal, but, in general, it would be an odd decision not to take a mortgage with a lower initial rate then move it to another when it goes to the SVR.
I don’t know about anyone else, but where I am (Surrey/Hants Borders), rents are actually cheaper than mortgages..
Yes, and thats why lots of otherwise successful high earning younger generation have normalised extravagant rents. I'm aware of people who pay higher rate tax but have been paying these prices for decades, and the problems comes when some of these people now don't have jobs thanks to the 'Rona and not much else to fall back on. UC won't even scratch the surface of outgoings like that. Incase you're wondering how people end up in that situation, in the place I grew up down South there is currently nothing on the market below £600k according to Rightmove...
Well yeah, you can tweak the numbers either way tbh. I was just going on most likely max LTV in the current climate, standard term has always been 25 years, yes? 3% is probably the rate available to a FTB family at max LTV (it was for us, well, 2.8%). That's assuming family help to get the £60k deposit needed on 85%LTV, or say they have that in equity from having bought a 2-bed flat 5 years ago.
Put it this way, we were paying £950pcm rent on a 3-bed mid-terrace. Our 95%LTV mortgage on a £285k 2-bed mid-terrace (5% deposit was all we could get) is now £1200 a month. I know which one I'd rather be doing, but to say that mortgages are always cheaper than renting isn't true.
If every house cost its rebuild value, thousands of people would be lining up to buy it. And trying to out bid the other buyers. Straight away we are back where we started.
No we are not. You missed the bit where you can only sell your house for the rebuild value...
No we are not. You missed the bit where you can only sell your house for the rebuild value…
True, I misinterpreted that. This actually does make a compelling arguement.
So the first person to say "yes I'll buy", you have to sell to them. Houses would go in minutes round here. They'd go to people with £30k in the bank though, no time to talk to a mortgage advisor. So existing homeowners and those with rich parents still have an unassailable lead.
Once you have a house though, much better standard of life.
Well yeah, you can tweak the numbers either way tbh. I was just going on most likely max LTV in the current climate, standard term has always been 25 years, yes? 3% is probably the rate available to a FTB family at max LTV (it was for us, well, 2.8%). That’s assuming family help to get the £60k deposit needed on 85%LTV, or say they have that in equity from having bought a 2-bed flat 5 years ago.
Distills down to
you can tweak the numbers either way tbh
Agreed, which was my point. The original figures made it sound like renting was cheaper than mortgaging but it isn't straight-forward to make such a claim.
The only change I’m making is that you can’t pass on your house to the next generation. Once the purchaser dies, it gets sold.
Who gets the money?
The only change I’m making is that you can’t pass on your house to the next generation. Once the purchaser dies, it gets sold.
And all the allied trades associated with improving and adding value to houses completely collapse. Who's going to spend £100k on a big extension, £25k on a new kitchen, £10k on a patio etc., if it adds no value to their asset?
Who’s going to spend £100k on a big extension, £25k on a new kitchen, £10k on a patio etc., if it adds no value to their asset?
People who want those things. If you want a better kitchen then you can buy it, just like now. It just may not be an appreciating asset. Just like a car, a TV, an iPhone, a holiday, and all the other things we spend money on. In fact treating a home like an asset is a huge part of the problem
Who’s going to spend £100k on a big extension, £25k on a new kitchen, £10k on a patio etc., if it adds no value to their asset?
why doesnt any of that add value ?
it just incentivises you to sell up before you die and release equity to enjoy it instead of folk going to the bitter end in the 5 bedroom pile that then gets sold to the property developer to turn into an HMO for the students* and inheritance taxed to the hilt ..... or passed to your kids in the hope you dont die in 7 years....
*extreme case
Who’s going to spend £100k on a big extension, £25k on a new kitchen, £10k on a patio etc., if it adds no value to their asset?
People who want a nice home? The problem is speculative increases in value that have no basis in the value of physical assets - for example no one is adding a 10k patio to a BTL
Agreed, which was my point. The original figures made it sound like renting was cheaper than mortgaging but it isn’t straight-forward to make such a claim.
when you factor in inflation, and a longer term view, it definitely is. Rents generally rise roughly at the rate of inflation, mortgages don't. after ~20 years your rent is likely to have doubles but your mortgage remained constant (or, more likely dropped, as you get access to reasonable mortgage deals). I agree it may be less affordable in the short term (~3 years) though
when you factor in inflation, and a longer term view, it definitely is. Rents generally rise roughly at the rate of inflation, mortgages don’t. after ~20 years your rent is likely to have doubles but your mortgage remained constant (or, more likely dropped, as you get access to reasonable mortgage deals). I agree it may be less affordable in the short term (~3 years) though
Again, I agree. To say one is cheaper than the other is an impossible claim unless you take identical circumstances. For example, a person who has to move lots with their job may find it cheaper to rent than to constantly keep selling their house whereas someone who just wants a house with no intention of ever moving would undoubtedly be better off in the long term (ie, 30 yrs +) with a mortgage at the outset.
What would it take for house prices to REALLY plummet?
Rising sea levels due to rampant global warning should sort out all the overpriced coastal areas.
Some sort of global pandemic should sort out the overcrowded and overpriced cities.
Won't happen in my lifetime.
Probably.
Out of interest. How do things work in other European countries? I get the impression you don’t get this problem as much elsewhere.
There’s some OECD data here https://data.oecd.org/price/housing-prices.htm
Not necessarily what you’re expecting
Who’s going to spend £100k on a big extension, £25k on a new kitchen, £10k on a patio etc., if it adds no value to their asset?
That's the problem with this concept, isn't it. At the end of your life your house goes to... what, I don't know, social housing? but you've had no incentive to do any work on it for the last 40 years and so it's Donald Ducked.
This thread is amazing. The solution is seemingly to simultaneously do away with both the ability to rent and the ability to buy. I'm buying shares in static caravan manufacturers.
And when the share price of caravan manufacturers rise you'll be accused of profiteering.
Same principle will also apply if you buy shares in tent manufacturers.
It's a matter of historical fact that carriages can be made from pumpkins, and white mice be repurposed for the transportation of said vehicle. Caravans should be an easy development.
Now we've moved onto mistreatment of white mice.
That’s the problem with this concept, isn’t it. At the end of your life your house goes to… what, I don’t know, social housing? but you’ve had no incentive to do any work on it for the last 40 years and so it’s Donald Ducked.
That depends on what incentivises you doesn't it? Living somewhere nice that you like or "adding value" for the next never ending upgrade to... ...what exactly?
Call me a mug if you like but I spend about 15k on an extension, about 2k knocking out a wall and another k on the garden, added value is probably half that at best. Why? Because I want to enjoy living here.
People spend money on their house in the same way they spend money on modifying cars, tattoos, hairstyles or whatever else you care to think of that costs money but has no tangible value to anyone else. Similarly people seem quite happy living in [url= https://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-for-sale/property-72172785.html ]utter shit piles[/url] as it is.